Study on the preventive value of infection prevention and control system for perioperative nosocomial infection in patients with traumatic fracture
-
摘要:
目的 感染为创伤性骨折常见的并发症,严重者会危及生命,对创伤性骨折患者院内感染进行有效预防具有必要性,通过探讨构建感染防控体系的价值,为临床预防院内感染提供指导。 方法 以随机样本抽样法,在温州医科大学附属第二医院(2019年7月—2020年9月)收治的创伤性骨折患者中,收集88例,以随机数字表法分为对照组(常规干预)、观察组(构建感染防控体系),比较2组患者院内感染发生率、炎性因子指标、骨折愈合情况、并发症发生率。 结果 观察组院内感染发生率(2.27%)明显低于对照组(18.18%),差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。干预前,2组患者CRP、IL-1β、TNF-α水平比较差异无统计学意义(均P > 0.05);干预后,观察组CRP[(7.89±1.40)mg/L]、IL-1β[(20.08±3.11)pg/mL]、TNF-α[(7.89±1.20)pg/mL]水平均低于对照组[(11.01±1.42)mg/L、(25.11±3.34)pg/mL、(12.01±1.40)pg/mL,均P < 0.05]。观察组临床愈合率(93.18%)、骨折愈合率(100.00%)均高于对照组(77.27%、81.82%,均P < 0.05)。观察组并发症发生率(4.55%)低于对照组(20.45%),差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。 结论 感染防控体系构建应用效果显著,可有效降低创伤性骨折术后并发症发生率,改善炎症指标与骨折愈合情况。 Abstract:Objective Infection is a common complication of traumatic fracture, which can be life-threatening in severe cases. It is necessary to effectively prevent nosocomial infection in patients with traumatic fracture. By discussing the value of constructing infection prevention and control system, we can provide guidance for clinical prevention of nosocomial infection. Methods Total 88 patients with traumatic fracture collected in our hospital from July 2019 to September 2020 were randomly divided into control group (routine intervention) and observation group (construction of infection prevention and control system). The nosocomial infection rate, inflammatory factor index, fracture healing and complication rate of the two groups were compared. Results The incidence of nosocomial infection in the observation group (2.27%) was significantly lower than that in the control group (18.18%), the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Before intervention, there was no significant difference in the level of CRP, IL-1β and TNF-α in the two groups (all P>0.05). After intervention, the levels of CRP [(7.89±1.40) mg/L], IL-1β [(20.08±3.11) pg/mL] and TNF-α [(7.89±1.20) pg/mL] in the observation group were lower than those in the control group [(11.01±1.42) mg/L, (25.11±3.34) pg/mL, (12.01±1.40) pg/mL, all P < 0.05]. The clinical healing rate (93.18%) and fracture healing rate (100.00%) in the observation group were higher than those in the control group (77.27% and 81.82%, all P < 0.05). The incidence of complications in the observation group (4.55%) was lower than that in the control group (20.45%, P < 0.05). Conclusion The construction and application of infection prevention and control system has a significant effect, which can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative complications of traumatic fracture and improve inflammatory indexes and fracture healing. -
Key words:
- Nosocomial infection /
- Traumatic fracture /
- Complication /
- Fracture healing
-
表 1 2组创伤性骨折患者院内感染发生率比较[例(%)]
组别 例数 切口感染 肺部感染 泌尿感染 总发生 对照组 44 4(9.09) 2(4.55) 2(4.55) 8(18.18) 观察组 44 1(2.27) 0 0 1(2.27) 注:2组院内感染总发生率比较,χ2=4.455,P=0.034。 表 2 2组创伤性骨折患者炎性因子指标比较(x ±s)
组别 例数 CRP(mg/L) IL-1β(pg/mL) TNF-α(pg/mL) 干预前 干预后 干预前 干预后 干预前 干预后 对照组 44 6.32±0.95 11.01±1.42a 16.62±2.28 25.11±3.34a 36.30±4.56 12.01±1.40a 观察组 44 6.34±0.96 7.89±1.40a 16.64±2.30 20.08±3.11a 36.35±4.58 7.89±1.20a t值 0.098 10.379 0.041 7.311 0.051 14.821 P值 0.922 < 0.001 0.967 < 0.001 0.959 < 0.001 注:与干预前比较,aP < 0.05。 表 3 2组创伤性骨折患者骨折愈合情况比较[例(%)]
组别 例数 临床愈合 骨折愈合 对照组 44 34(77.27) 36(81.82) 观察组 44 41(93.18) 44(100.00) χ2值 4.422 6.737 P值 0.035 0.009 表 4 2组创伤性骨折患者并发症发生情况比较
组别 例数 压疮[例(%)] 深静脉血栓[例(%)] 便秘[例(%)] 疼痛[例(%)] 并发症发生率(%) 对照组 44 2(4.55) 2(4.55) 3(6.82) 2(4.55) 20.45 观察组 44 1(2.27) 0 0 1(2.27) 4.55 注:2组并发症发生率比较,χ2=5.090,P=0.024。 -
[1] 焦闪云, 王静, 徐玲, 等. 整体干预对四肢创伤骨折患者术后疼痛的影响[J]. 山西医药杂志, 2019, 48(23): 2992-2994. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-9926.2019.23.061 [2] 曹莹莹. 责任制护理在四肢骨折患者围术期护理中的应用[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2019, 23(24): 98-100. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XYZL201924032.htm [3] 中华医学会骨科学分会创伤骨科学组, 中华医学会骨科学分会外固定与肢体重建学组, 中国医师协会创伤外科医师分会创伤感染专业委员会, 等. 中国开放性骨折诊断与治疗指南(2019版)[J]. 中华创伤骨科杂志, 2019, 21(11): 921-928. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-7600.2019.11.001 [4] 付晖. 优质护理干预对髋关节骨折患者骨折愈合及功能恢复的影响[J]. 中国急救医学, 2018, 38(z1): 342. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1949.2018.z1.328 [5] 贾宏业. 预防性护理模式构建对老年脊柱骨折术中压疮的预防效果[J]. 实用临床医药杂志, 2018, 22(2): 128-129, 132. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XYZL201802039.htm [6] 帅健萍. 围术期预见性护理降低下肢骨折患者下肢深静脉血栓发生率的效果分析[J]. 中华全科医学, 2018, 16(12): 2121-2123. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-SYQY201812048.htm [7] 刘思婷, 张志忠, 陈琼. 流程化护理措施对VSD修复创伤性骨折合并软组织损伤的创面恢复及预后的影响[J]. 海南医学, 2019, 30(13): 1763-1766. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-6350.2019.13.037 [8] 沈秋, 马云萍. 快速康复护理模式对骨折术后患者生活自理能力的影响分析[J]. 中国药物与临床, 2019, 19(23): 4211-4213. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-YWLC201923097.htm [9] 万海艳, 周贵, 王慧玲, 等. 大数据时代护理人员医院感染防控能力现状和体系构建[J]. 昆明医科大学学报, 2019, 40(5): 31-36. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-4706.2019.05.006 [10] 万甜甜, 陈金玲, 史敬丽. 预见性创伤护理对急诊创伤性骨折患者救治效果研究[J]. 山西医药杂志, 2020, 49(6): 732-733. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-9926.2020.06.040 [11] 金平湖. 快速康复护理模式在骨科患者围手术期中的应用[J]. 护士进修杂志, 2018, 33(23): 2168-2170. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-FSJX201823017.htm [12] 严悦. 前期护理预防老年创伤性骨折围术期深静脉血栓形成的探讨[J]. 血栓与止血学, 2019, 25(4): 690-691. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-6213.2019.04.059 [13] 郝晶, 张婷, 严文萍. 手术室预见性护理干预在医院感染预防及患者满意度应用中的效果评价[J]. 检验医学与临床, 2018, 15(16): 2502-2504, 2517. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-9455.2018.16.046 [14] 曹玉净, 吕秋霞, 李扬. 创伤骨折下肢深静脉血栓形成及感染危险因素分析[J]. 中国病原生物学杂志, 2019, 14(9): 1096-1099. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZISC201909024.htm [15] 李睛, 李亚丽. 对四肢创伤骨折急性疼痛患者进行针对性护理的效果[J]. 中国急救医学, 2018, 38(z2): 211. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-1949.2018.z2.211 [16] 李佳, 胡向英. 精细化护理对于开放性四肢骨折术后切口感染的影响研究[J]. 山西医药杂志, 2019, 48(16): 2085-2087. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.0253-9926.2019.16.059 -

计量
- 文章访问数: 188
- HTML全文浏览量: 188
- PDF下载量: 1
- 被引次数: 0